This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 13, 2013, March 13, 2015, March 13, 2018, March 13, 2019, March 13, 2020, and March 13, 2022. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I thought the Gov't moved to Dresden during the Kapp Putsch! Please check this source for me
I question whether this term adds anything other than left-wing rhetoric to the discussion. The leaders of the putsch may, indeed, have been supporters of monarchy, and saying that is legitimate; but calling them "reactionary" is imposing a political value judgment and conclusion of a peculiar historical school, which constitutes not fact but opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.17.202 ( talk) 21:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
It appears that the references to "reactionary" are derived from the Encyclopedia Britannica article of 1922- a well-known repository of "left-wing rhetoric". Ning-ning ( talk) 22:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Meanings and uses do change over time...and I would propose that the meaning of "reactionary" is indeed now much more negative (and POV) than in 1922. Moreover, given the distance in time to 1920, it is better to enumerate what these forces wanted to go back to (monarchy, strong military, etc.). It was probably obvious at the time, but is not necessarily so to today's WP users. Drow69 ( talk) 17:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
An event that took place in 1920 can't really be said to have taken place "during the German Revolution of 1918–1919". -- 89.27.36.41 ( talk) 00:28, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Could someone pls verify the troop numbers given in the Background section? Does this really refer to "early 1919"? If so, it it not really relevant to the situation in early 1920 as the "old" army of WWI was still being demobilised in early 1919. Moreover, it was not the Reichswehr yet. Technically, the regular troops were still part of the old army until the National Assembly passed a law on Feb. 6 establishing the "Transitionary Reichswehr" (which included the Navy). This was superseded in Oct. 1919 when the name changed to "Übergangsheer". The actual "Reichswehr" was only established on Jan. 1, 1921.
I do have different numbers for early 1920: regular troops and Freikorps totalled around 400k at the time according to two sources. Drow69 ( talk) 17:39, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
The introduction uses the terms legitimate or illegitimate three times. I am not sure it should be used at all. The de facto government was itself illegitimate, having been created in a revolution less than 2 years earlier. Royalcourtier ( talk) 05:56, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 13, 2013, March 13, 2015, March 13, 2018, March 13, 2019, March 13, 2020, and March 13, 2022. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I thought the Gov't moved to Dresden during the Kapp Putsch! Please check this source for me
I question whether this term adds anything other than left-wing rhetoric to the discussion. The leaders of the putsch may, indeed, have been supporters of monarchy, and saying that is legitimate; but calling them "reactionary" is imposing a political value judgment and conclusion of a peculiar historical school, which constitutes not fact but opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.17.202 ( talk) 21:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
It appears that the references to "reactionary" are derived from the Encyclopedia Britannica article of 1922- a well-known repository of "left-wing rhetoric". Ning-ning ( talk) 22:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Meanings and uses do change over time...and I would propose that the meaning of "reactionary" is indeed now much more negative (and POV) than in 1922. Moreover, given the distance in time to 1920, it is better to enumerate what these forces wanted to go back to (monarchy, strong military, etc.). It was probably obvious at the time, but is not necessarily so to today's WP users. Drow69 ( talk) 17:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
An event that took place in 1920 can't really be said to have taken place "during the German Revolution of 1918–1919". -- 89.27.36.41 ( talk) 00:28, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Could someone pls verify the troop numbers given in the Background section? Does this really refer to "early 1919"? If so, it it not really relevant to the situation in early 1920 as the "old" army of WWI was still being demobilised in early 1919. Moreover, it was not the Reichswehr yet. Technically, the regular troops were still part of the old army until the National Assembly passed a law on Feb. 6 establishing the "Transitionary Reichswehr" (which included the Navy). This was superseded in Oct. 1919 when the name changed to "Übergangsheer". The actual "Reichswehr" was only established on Jan. 1, 1921.
I do have different numbers for early 1920: regular troops and Freikorps totalled around 400k at the time according to two sources. Drow69 ( talk) 17:39, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
The introduction uses the terms legitimate or illegitimate three times. I am not sure it should be used at all. The de facto government was itself illegitimate, having been created in a revolution less than 2 years earlier. Royalcourtier ( talk) 05:56, 10 April 2014 (UTC)